BayouSlide

You can always use your Stage Setup Notes for particulars like this as well. Nice work Curtis

Spanky, you want to make sure that there are no paper targets in line with your steel from any potential shooting location. It looks you may have a problem with that unless it was addressed during set up. Per 9.1.5.2, a shoot through that strikes down a popper is considered range equipment failure, necessitating reshoots and resulting in match delays. Curtis

Per 2.1.3, steel must be a minimum of 23 feet away, or 26 feet if only a fault line exists, to account for the possibility of a foot fault. Curtis

Lucky guys! Still way too steamy and summerlike around here for my taste. Curtis Edited: 'cause I hate typos!

Thanks guys! Ciurtis

Flex, based on the new revisions to the Production rules, base pads are specifically allowed if they fit in the box. From NROI Interpretation for the Production Division Equipment Rules (Appendix D4), June 25, 2009 21.7 (New) Magazines Prior restrictions on magazines have been lifted. OEM and aftermarket magazines and base-pads may be used. However, any and all magazines used in competition, must fit into the USPSA box while empty and inserted in the handgun as described in item 7 of this appendix. Grip tape and/or skate board tape are specifically allowed on magazines and base-pads Curtis

Slick set up. I've always been a fan of Maxpedition products. Curtis

Actually, from my reading, there have been a lot of citations of the rule book which show that the rules are very clear as they stand now. Which has nothing to do with whether or not they should be changed. The most you should expect from an RO is strict adherence to the rule book. Work to change the rules if you're unhappy with them. You'll find a lot of posts from me during period of comment on the recent revisions to the rules in Production: I thought the most recent rule book didn't fairly address some issues regarding modifications. Many people, but not everyone, felt the same: those rules were changed. That's the way to deal with the issue, not asking match officials to read between the lines of the rule book to find something that's not there. Curtis

That is correct, but the overriding rule here is C.1.6, IMO, which is what I would have to apply in this issue. You might on the surface be able to make a case for 4.6.1 here, but let's look at the entire clause: "Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably to all competitors. Range equipment failure includes, the displacement of paper targets, the premature activation of metal or moving targets, the failure to reset moving targets or steel targets, the malfunction of mechanically or electrically operated equipment, and the failure of props such as openings, ports, and barriers." In context, I would not be inclined to consider a popper "mechanically or electrically operated equipment." Steel targets were covered under the wording I bolded-italicized. I read "mechanically or electrically operated equipment" as the mechanisms that activate or move targets like movers or swingers. Granted, there is a small amount of wiggle room here, but in this case C.1.6 so directly covers the incident that it holds sway, IMO. When the shooter drove down the target, she crossed the Rubicon, unfortunately. It was a decision for the shooter and it was made. Curtis Edited: 'cause I hate typos!

Not trying to be an advocate for the ROs here, or for the shooter, just trying to be an impartial observer based on the rules. Unfortunately, once the competitor made the choice to shoot down the popper then, even if there was something wrong with it, under the current rules (C.1.6) this is how it had to play out. Don't shoot the messenger, but if I had been the CRO, or on the arb committee, I would have no choice but to rule exactly the same way they did. That's how the current rule book reads. It's absolutely clear. If they had decided to go off on the page on this ruling, there would be other competitors who would have a legitimate bone to pick with them—and probably would have been quick to do so. Whether, ultimately, the whole incident was fair or not, or whether that rule should be changed, is another question and worthy of debate. The second hardest thing about being an RO is knowing the all the rules, the hardest thing is applying them consistently and properly in the midst of all the gray areas that present themselves in a match. We're shooters too. And I approach every match with the understanding that, for every competitor, U to GM, whether local or Level III, this is an important match that deserves my best efforts in being impartial and knowledgeable in applying the rules so they have as level a playing field as possible. Curtis

Excellent point, Chuck, an important one that had not been brought up thus far....This particular set up calls for multiple shots to drop the popper as quickly as possible to get to the final steel, which will stop the clock. Even for competitors with mag limitations like Production, you will probably go into that position with a full or nearly full mag. I know I did when I shot that stage at our monthly match in October. The seconds cost the same whether you're shooting or waiting for the popper to fall. How many of those eight hits occurred as the steel had barely begun to fall, with the sort of split times expected from a national caliber competitor? This particular stage would be a bad example to use to make a case for an RO to call REF on the fly, even if the rules permitted it. Personally, as an RO I follow the rule book. If the rules change, I follow the new rules. No problem either way. The rules may be clear, but I can understand the reasoning of those who offer a compelling rationale for changing them. However, we have to also realize that the more discretion we give to the RO in a case like this, the more we increase the likelihood of varying interpretation, which can also serve to un-level the playing field. Curtis Edited: 'cause I hate typos!

Actually, the rules cover it quite clearly if it's hit once...or more than once. If the rules intended otherwise, we would have no procedure for shooter choice or calibration. 4.3.1.5 Scoring metal targets must be shot and fall or overturn to score. Scoring Poppers which fail to fall when hit, are subject to the provisions of Appendix C1, 6 & 7. From C. 6 6. If, during a course of fire, a popper does not fall when hit, a competitor has three alternatives: a. The popper is shot again until it falls. In this case, no further action is required and the course of fire is scored “as shot”. b. The popper is left standing but the competitor does not challenge the calibration. In this case, no further action is required and the course of fire is scored “as shot”, with the subject popper scored as a miss. c. The popper is left standing and the competitor challenges the calibration. Not trying to beat this to death but, to me, the greatest unfairness occurs when we don't understand the rules and apply them consistently. Curtis

I can understand the frustration. Unfortunately, "common sense" is a slippery slope. The present rules are actually very clear on this issue. Reading between the lines opens up the issue of fairness regarding varying interpretations from match to match and RO to RO. Someone much wiser than me said "That's why they are rules, not suggestions." Rules are like glass in that respect: they can't be bent, only broken. It's in the rule book and it's clearly stated. Until the rules are changed, this is what we have to work with. Curtis Edited: to add a point and 'cause I hate typos!

Under 4.6, REF would only apply to a popper that wasn't reset (or one that fell due to wind or other outside influence, i.e. premature activation), not one that didn't fall after being hit. Calibration challenge is the only recourse for one that doesn't fall when hit. Curtis

Sure, steel poses the occasional problem. But the vast majority of the time it works as intended, as Nik notes, if the stage crew does it's job properly. When it doesn't, the rules already in place provide a manner of dealing with it without adding an unreasonable amount of time or complicating issues of match management. If it presents continual problems, the stage can and should be pulled. But the final recourse is always in the hands of the competitor. To me, the competitor has to make a judgement...and should be prepared to do so in a split second during a run. Personally, if a popper didn't fall for me after two solid hits, I'd move on and call for calibration, because at that point I'd be reasonably confident that the rules in place would set things straight. This particular issue has resulted in a thought-provoking discussion, and a raised awareness of the potential issues with steel that I haven't personally experienced. But all the proposed solutions have potential downsides as well, it seems to me. I guess I would fall into the camp of preferring the status quo. Personally, this particular incident would make me prefer to have critical pieces of steel reset and checked by an RO rather than by competitors, to make sure it was staying free and consistent in operation for everyone over the course of the match. People with more major match experience than me may feel differently and I'm interested in their viewpoints. Edited to add: FWIW, our local club set up and shot this exact stage from the Nationals at our last monthly match without any issues.

Stubb's for beef, Sweet Baby Ray's for pork or chicken. Curtis

A brain implant with periodic downloaded updates is probably the best way to handle that. Curtis

See the link in Post #36. In the past, lunch has often been jambalaya. Curtis

Because poppers have a certain mechanical element they are kind of like a river...you never stand in the same river twice...and a popper once it falls can't be guaranteed to be exactly the same as it was standing. That's why the rule is written the way it is. Poppers are imperfect and the rules on calibration are as good as it will get. Curtis I love your name, I love Bayou Teche, and I love Sonny Landreth, but I have to respectfully disagree. Why can the rules on calibration not get better? I know you know a lot more about this than I do, I am just a shooter, but steel f**** up a lot, it's the nature of steel. As Xre pointed out, there are many angles to poppers falling. Targets change, poppers change, new targets get introduced. Is there some background on poppers that we need to know about that make them impervious to rule changes or modifications? Thanks. Sonny's an acquaintance of mine who lives one town farther down the Teche than I do...I'll pass on your best wishes next time I see him I agree with you completely that steel is imperfect. Some type of poppers work better than others but all pose potential problems. I've been on both sides of the issue. I've ROed shooters who have had problems with poppers and I've had problems myself...once requested for a calibration in a Level II match due to a popper than didn't fall and won the calibration. But once a popper is down, there is no way to test the exact same popper that the shooter was shooting at. That is the root of the problem. The bolt may have moved and bound up a little, for example, but once the popper finally falls after multiple hits, it's now freed up and working fine. If the shooter moved on, the popper probably wouldn't fall during the calibration...but then again, maybe it might because the earlier hit that didn't take it down loosened it up a little. Conversely, if the ground is getting beaten up, with every fall, the popper's base may be moving it's upright angle a degree or more backwards or forward, which will affect its operation and what sort of hit will take it down. Some of the new forward falling poppers may work a little more consistently. But the point is, there are a lot of variables that can affect a poppers operation and once it falls, it becomes nearly impossible to duplicate exactly its condition during the shooter's run. We shooters in Production with minor PF ammo have the toughest decisions in this regard. Poppers are always more problematic than a straightforward hit on paper. Once an RO has to start making judgement calls on why multiple hits don't drop it, we've traded one problem for another. Ultimately, the decision is and should be in the shooter's hands. If you hit it solid in the calibration zone and you know your ammo is to spec, then move on and call for a calibration. If you're not sure, hit it again and then move on. To me, the present system may not seem perfect, but it's as fair as possible considering the variables that poppers can present. Curtis

Because poppers have a certain mechanical element they are kind of like a river...you never stand in the same river twice...and a popper once it falls can't be guaranteed to be exactly the same as it was standing. That's why the rule is written the way it is. Poppers are imperfect and the rules on calibration are as good as it will get. Curtis

George Jones held my feet to the fire throughout the course work, and I'm a better range officer because of it. Sometimes during the course, when I felt I knew only half as much as I needed to know, he'd help me realize I knew twice as much as when I started out...and that the key to uncovering that other half was within the pages of a well-thumbed rule book Thanks, again, George, for all your time and patience. I think I'm most proud just to be part of an organization like USPSA that puts so much effort into improving our knowledge so that we can continue to raise the standard of our matches. And I'm especially grateful to all those individuals with the NROI who put in so much time into teaching and sharing their years of experience. Curtis

The only thing that may make a difference for you is primer sensitivity, depending on your set up. Trigger work on pistols or revolvers may lighten the strike on the primer, making more sensitive primers more reliable than harder primers. Curtis Edited: 'cause I hate typos!

http://www.bayoushooter.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23858 Curtis Oops...I now see scooterj already added one to his earlier post

Yes, that is coaching. 8.6.1 No assistance of any kind can be given to a competitor during a course of fire, except that any Range Officer assigned to a stage may issue safety warnings to a competitor at any time. Such warnings will not be grounds for the competitor to be awarded a reshoot. 8.6.2 Any person providing interference or unauthorized assistance to a competitor during a course of fire (and the competitor receiving such assistance) may, at the discretion of a Range Officer, incur a procedural penalty for that stage and/or be subject to Section 10.6. Curtis

Get ready now for next year Curtis. I might actually practice, dry fire or something between now and then. I'll stick with my longtime training regimen of learning to miss faster, thank you very much Curtis